Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Claude Opus 4.5
Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison
Related topics (12)
Claude Sonnet 4.6 by Anthropic and Claude Opus 4.5 by Anthropic represent two of the frontier AI models analyzed in our comprehensive 2026 AI benchmark and LLM comparison. In this head-to-head evaluation, we examine API token pricing, context window specifications, inference speed (tokens per second), and empirical reasoning performance. From a pure economic perspective, Claude Sonnet 4.6 holds a notable pricing advantage for token ingestion. On output generation, Claude Sonnet 4.6 is more economical per million generated tokens. In data-heavy architectures requiring extensive repository or document analysis, Claude Sonnet 4.6 provides an expanded memory horizon with 1,000K tokens. In latency-sensitive production environments, Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads in tokens-per-second throughput, making it ideal for real-time conversational agents and high-concurrency workflows. Below is the complete empirical head-to-head breakdown across cost, speed, context, and capability matrices.
Switch & Compare Any Models
Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Production WorkhorseThe daily driver enterprise champion of early 2026, pairing a 1-million-token context window with rapid throughput and rock-solid tool calling.
$3.00 / 1M
$15.00 / 1M
1M tokens
76.1%
Claude Opus 4.5
Quality LeaderAnthropic's flagship quality leader, delivering frontier reasoning and creative capability at a 66% lower price than Opus 4.1, making premium intelligence far more accessible.
$5.00 / 1M
$25.00 / 1M
200K tokens
77.2%
Key Differences at a Glance
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 is 1.7x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 has a larger context window (1M vs 200K tokens).
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 is faster at 92 tok/s vs 62 tok/s.
- Claude Opus 4.5 leads on SWE-bench coding (77.2% vs 76.1%).
| Feature | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Claude Opus 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
Intelligence Index Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100) | 60 | 63 |
Provider | Anthropic | Anthropic |
Input Price Cost per million input tokens | $3.00 / 1M | $5.00 / 1M |
Output Price Cost per million output tokens | $15.00 / 1M | $25.00 / 1M |
Blended Price Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M | $2.31 / 1M | $3.85 / 1M |
Context Window Maximum input + output tokens | 1M tokens~1,500 A4 pages of text | 200K tokens~300 A4 pages of text |
Max Output Tokens Per single request | 128K | 64K |
Throughput Speed Tokens generated per second | 92 tok/s | 62 tok/s |
SWE-bench Verified Real-world software engineering | 76.1% | 77.2% |
GPQA Diamond Graduate-level reasoning | 74% | 74.8% |
Cached Input Price Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens | $0.30 / 1M | $0.50 / 1M |
Who Wins Where?
At-a-glance decision frameworkEmpirical Head-to-Head Benchmark Scores
Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.
Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.
Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.
Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.
Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.
Extremely difficult, closed-ended questions spanning the frontier of human expert knowledge.
Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.
Research-grade coding problems drawn from real scientific and numerical workloads.
Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.
American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.
Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.
Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.
Latency & Response Time
Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.
Real-Time Interactive Token Cost Simulator
Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 · Strengths & Key Advantages
- Balanced $3/$15 economics combined with a full 1M token context window
- Exceptional 92 tokens/sec throughput for interactive developer environments
- Precise structured JSON output compliance and computer-use agent execution
Considerations & Trade-offs
- Slightly behind Opus 4.6 on highly abstract mathematical research tasks
- Requires careful prompt caching configuration to optimize 1M token ingestion costs
Claude Opus 4.5 · Strengths & Key Advantages
- Best-in-class complex reasoning and nuanced analysis
- 66% cheaper than Opus 4.1 while keeping flagship quality
- Excellent long-form creative and high-stakes decision output
- 90% cached-input discount ($0.50 per 1M tokens)
Considerations & Trade-offs
- Highest output price ($25/1M) among mainstream flagships
- Slower throughput and higher latency than lightweight models
Token Use & Task Economics
Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Claude Opus 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
Cost per Task Estimated USD to finish one task | $3.29 | $5.86 |
Output Tokens / Task Tokens generated per task | 72K | 73K |
Reasoning Tokens / Task Thinking tokens burned per task | 37K | 43K |
Technical Specifications
Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.
| Feature | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Claude Opus 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Official API Model ID (SDK) | claude-sonnet-4-6-20260201 | claude-opus-4-5-20251101 |
| API Protocol | Anthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AI | Anthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AI |
| Release Date | 2026-02 | 2025-11 |
| Knowledge Cutoff | December 2025 | March 2025 |
| Architecture | High-Throughput Multimodal Agent Transformer | Hybrid Reasoning |
| Parameters | Confidential | Confidential |
| Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM) | 4,000 – 10,000 RPM (Tier 4 + Priority Tier) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPM | 4,000 – 10,000 RPM (Tier 4 + Priority Tier) · 800,000 – 2,000,000 TPM |
| Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K) | Standard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokens | Standard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokens |
| Prompt Cache Policy & TTL | $0.3/1M cached read (90% off); 5-min default & 1-hour extended TTL | $0.5/1M cached read (90% off); 5-min default & 1-hour extended TTL |
| Computer Use / GUI Agent | Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops) | Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops) |
| MCP & Parallel Tool Calling | Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema | Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema |
| Web Search Grounding & Sandbox | Native Web Search Citations + Code Execution Tool + MCP Connectors | Native Web Search Citations + Code Execution Tool + MCP Connectors |
| Official Fine-Tuning Support | Custom Model Tuning via Amazon Bedrock & Prompt Distillation | Custom Model Tuning via Amazon Bedrock & Prompt Distillation |
| Multimodal Token Billing | Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile) | Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile) |
| Quantization & Min GPU VRAM | Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API) | Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API) |
| Safety & Frontier Classification | Anthropic RSP ASL-2 / ASL-3 Constitutional Safety Evaluated | Anthropic RSP ASL-2 / ASL-3 Constitutional Safety Evaluated |
| Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2) | SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier | SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier |
| Input Modalities | text, vision | text, vision |
| Output Modalities | text | text |
Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Claude Opus 4.5: Quick Answers
Which is more intelligent, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Claude Opus 4.5?
Claude Opus 4.5 is more intelligent. It scores 63 compared with 60 on the composite Intelligence Index.
Which model is faster?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is faster, generating 92 tokens per second compared with 62 tokens per second.
Which model is cheaper to run?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is cheaper at $2.31 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $3.85 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).
Which model has lower latency?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.65s compared with 2.10s.
Which model has a larger context window?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 has a larger context window, supporting 1M tokens compared with 200K tokens.
Verdict
Verdict & Model Selection Recommendation: Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6 if your priority is Production coding copilots, full-repo code search, customer agent workflows, and automated workflows. Its performance in demanding tasks justifies its operational token cost. Choose Claude Opus 4.5 if your workflow prioritizes Complex reasoning, creative work, and high-stakes decision making where quality outweighs cost. For large-scale batch processing or customer-facing conversational interfaces, its balance of speed and economics delivers superior ROI.
Frequently asked questions
How does Claude Sonnet 4.6 compare to Claude Opus 4.5 in API token pricing and cost per token?+
Claude Sonnet 4.6 costs $3.00 per 1M input tokens and $15.00 per 1M output tokens, whereas Claude Opus 4.5 costs $5.00 input and $25.00 output. Overall, Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the more cost-effective model for high-volume API pipelines. Both models support prompt caching discounts of up to 90% for repeated prompt prefixes.
Which model has a larger context window: Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Claude Opus 4.5?+
Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports a context window of 1,000K tokens (~750k words), while Claude Opus 4.5 supports 200K tokens (~150k words). Therefore, Claude Sonnet 4.6 can process more textual data and document context in a single prompt.
Which AI model is better for software engineering and coding: Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Claude Opus 4.5?+
Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 76.1% on SWE-bench Verified while Claude Opus 4.5 scores 77.2%. For autonomous software engineering and multi-file debugging, Claude Opus 4.5 holds the verified benchmark lead.
What is the difference in reasoning capability and extended thinking between Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Claude Opus 4.5?+
Claude Sonnet 4.6 features native chain-of-thought extended thinking mode with configurable reasoning effort. In contrast, Claude Opus 4.5 provides chain-of-thought reasoning depth for complex math and science.
How does inference speed (tokens per second) compare between Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Claude Opus 4.5?+
Claude Sonnet 4.6 generates approximately 92 tokens per second, while Claude Opus 4.5 delivers 62 tokens per second. In latency-sensitive production environments, Claude Sonnet 4.6 provides faster time-to-first-token (TTFT) and higher streaming response velocity.
Can you implement a tiered LLM routing setup combining Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Claude Opus 4.5 to optimize costs?+
Yes! High-efficiency architectures route high-frequency routine classification and conversational tasks to Claude Sonnet 4.6 to save operational costs, and dynamically escalate complex architectural queries or reasoning tasks to Claude Opus 4.5. This tiered routing pattern cuts overall API bills by up to 70%.
Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.
Related reading
- Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonCompare
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonCompare
- GPT-5.1 vs Claude Opus 4.5: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonCompare
- GPT-5.2 Chat vs Claude Opus 4.5: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonCompare
- Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo vs Claude Opus 4.5: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonCompare
- o3 vs Claude Opus 4.5: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonCompare
Benchmark scores, token prices, and rate limits evolve rapidly as AI labs release model updates. Always verify current specifications and pricing on the official provider documentation.
Sources: GetInfoUs Independent AI Benchmarks & Official API Specs